darrenyeats
pfm Member
Yeah, on Seldom Seen Kid, which is good example of unsuitable compression IMO! The Abbey Road live version is a bit better.
Loudness Wars, is the end actually coming?
- Thread starter Cjm75
- Start date
Julf
Facts are our friends
No, it is a data point. There is nothing anecdotal about it.
Go and talk to an artist. Last one I heard discussing it was David Byrne.
Yes, I happen to know the difference. I am not talking about EQ. I am talking about compression.
You are entitled to your opinion - I just remind you that it was you who wrote:
I have provided examples that disprove your point of view. You might chose to ignore them, or declare them anecdotal.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Sue, are you aware of EBU recommendation 128 and the implications? Do you know what it says about "Programme Loudness Level" and "Loudness Range", and how to measure it?
Julf
Facts are our friends
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
No, I'm not aware of the regs you cite. I'm aware of albums like 21 by Adele which are very unsatisfying to listen to, because compression has robbed the music of life. I struggle to believe this would be the artist's choice, if they were aware of the alternative. Elbow is far less offensively compressed than many.
You've told me you've read remarks by musicians. No links = no evidence. Isn't that how it works?
I'm not pressing the point, but if this was a subj/obj argument, what you offer would not be accepted as evidence, would it?
You've told me you've read remarks by musicians. No links = no evidence. Isn't that how it works?
I'm not pressing the point, but if this was a subj/obj argument, what you offer would not be accepted as evidence, would it?
merlin
Avatar changed - Town names deemed offensive.
The biggest selling album of the 21st century and the 5th biggest seller of all time.
Can't be that unsatisfying.
Back to the OP's original question, sadly I think the answer is no. I have not seen much recent improvement.
Taking a handful of this years popular releases we have:
Robert Plant lullaby and ... THE CEASELESS ROAR = DR6
Temples Sun Structures = DR6
The War On Drugs Lost In The Dream = DR8
Beck Morning Phase = DR6
Leonard Cohen Popular Problems = DR9 (although this one sounds good and seems just above the headache inducing compression level of the others)
The result for me is I will avoid buying virtually any new CD on release and listen on Spotify instead. If I really have to own it I might buy the vinyl. Thankfully I have a very large collection from the last 5 decades that still needs exploring.
Taking a handful of this years popular releases we have:
Robert Plant lullaby and ... THE CEASELESS ROAR = DR6
Temples Sun Structures = DR6
The War On Drugs Lost In The Dream = DR8
Beck Morning Phase = DR6
Leonard Cohen Popular Problems = DR9 (although this one sounds good and seems just above the headache inducing compression level of the others)
The result for me is I will avoid buying virtually any new CD on release and listen on Spotify instead. If I really have to own it I might buy the vinyl. Thankfully I have a very large collection from the last 5 decades that still needs exploring.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Not if you listen to it via earbuds, or in the car, or on a boombox, I'm sure. There are some very well crafted songs on that album, but through a system with any pretensions towards hifi, they are lifeless. Most people don't use such systems, so don't have a problem. Doesn't make it right, though.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
I'll do that. Got his number?
merlin
Avatar changed - Town names deemed offensive.
Record companies are surely commercial entities selling to the largest market.
You, me, and others with pretentious audio systems are an irrelevance.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Well, having followed that link, The Seldom Seen Kid CD isn't listed (I don't have the Live at Abbey Road, just the vanilla CD). The example cited with DR=8 is shown as lossy compression, unknown format, so evidently not a CD. It may not be the best example, frankly I buy so few chart albums I don't really notice, but when I do, I'm often disappointed. The Elbow one strikes me as one of the less offensively compressed albums, and the reference to 'turnitup.com' unlikely to be coincidental.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Well, kinda my point. The decision to apply compression is a commercial one, not an artistic one.
Julf
Facts are our friends
That's what I suspected. I suggest you check them out. here is a good place to start.
If you are allowed to cherry pick rules, I guess that is how it works, yes.
I pointed out a bunch of artists that care about sound, and have full artistic freedom, and showed you the dynamic range of their records. That is not anecdotal.
But this isn't a subj/obj argument - and trying to make it one smells of an agenda.
So what evidence have you supplied so far?
Julf
Facts are our friends
"The Take Off And Landing Of Everything" - DR7
"Build A Rocket Boys!" - DR7
Not sure I would call that "less offensively compressed".
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
Not an agenda, Julf, I assure you. Slightly mischievous, perhaps. You did, still, rely on an assertion that the band cares about quality.
I've just taken a quick look at EBU loudness recommendation 128 and it relates to broadcast loudness levels. Which seems, to me, to support an argument that record companies are compressing sound levels, to make their products sound superficially louder when broadcast, given the recommendations of EBU 128 WRT maximum loudness levels.
So what you seem to be saying is that it's not the record companies' fault, it's the EBU standards. But surely, however you dress it up, it's still a commercial decision, not an artistic one.
I agree, btw, that the later Elbow albums are disappointingly compressed and lifeless, I have copies which I never play.
I've just taken a quick look at EBU loudness recommendation 128 and it relates to broadcast loudness levels. Which seems, to me, to support an argument that record companies are compressing sound levels, to make their products sound superficially louder when broadcast, given the recommendations of EBU 128 WRT maximum loudness levels.
So what you seem to be saying is that it's not the record companies' fault, it's the EBU standards. But surely, however you dress it up, it's still a commercial decision, not an artistic one.
I agree, btw, that the later Elbow albums are disappointingly compressed and lifeless, I have copies which I never play.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Yes - just as you did.
I think we are seeing a perfect example of confirmation bias - of trying to fit the facts to a belief, rather than the other way around. Yes, not entirely surprising that a recommendation from the European Broadcasting Union is concerned about broadcasting (and not European Bitterness Units). Yes, it comes as no surprise to us that record companies, producers and artists have been compressing stuff to make it sound louder even since the 60's, but with EBU R128 that doesn't actually work very well, as EBU enforces norms that defeat the "goes to 11" compression. Thus there is no commercial incentive to compress any more.
Equally importantly R128 tells you how to measure and interpret loudness ranges, to help you compare recordings. If your theory was true, records form artists with greater artistic freedom would have a much wider dynamic range than recordings from "label-controlled" artists.
See what I did there? First we have empirical observations. Based on that we formulate a theory. Then we test the theory by making a prediction based on the theory, and seeing if the prediction actually corresponds to observed reality.
darrenyeats
pfm Member
Seldom Seen Kid is compressed with chopped off waveforms on the loud bits and crescendos i.e. precisely when you want it to move up a gear it doesn't. It was this album that turned me off the Turn It Up initiative.
And a shining example why initiatives don't work in general. People say one thing and do another.
Independent public transparency is a much better way to influence behaviour. Wriggling and misdirection aren't possible. DR has many problems but then any measure that gives a single number must necessarily be a compromise, the same goes for alternatives. The main things are consistency and openness, and DR Database provides these.
Get the live at Abbey Road edition, it's just a great disc IMO even forgetting DR which is still not great, the live orchestra works well with those compositions.
And a shining example why initiatives don't work in general. People say one thing and do another.
Independent public transparency is a much better way to influence behaviour. Wriggling and misdirection aren't possible. DR has many problems but then any measure that gives a single number must necessarily be a compromise, the same goes for alternatives. The main things are consistency and openness, and DR Database provides these.
Get the live at Abbey Road edition, it's just a great disc IMO even forgetting DR which is still not great, the live orchestra works well with those compositions.
darrenyeats
pfm Member
Why is this being turned into a binary argument again?Yes - just as you did.
I think we are seeing a perfect example of confirmation bias - of trying to fit the facts to a belief, rather than the other way around. Yes, not entirely surprising that a recommendation from the European Broadcasting Union is concerned about broadcasting (and not European Bitterness Units). Yes, it comes as no surprise to us that record companies, producers and artists have been compressing stuff to make it sound louder even since the 60's, but with EBU R128 that doesn't actually work very well, as EBU enforces norms that defeat the "goes to 11" compression. Thus there is no commercial incentive to compress any more.
Equally importantly R128 tells you how to measure and interpret loudness ranges, to help you compare recordings. If your theory was true, records form artists with greater artistic freedom would have a much wider dynamic range than recordings from "label-controlled" artists.
See what I did there? First we have empirical observations. Based on that we formulate a theory. Then we test the theory by making a prediction based on the theory, and seeing if the prediction actually corresponds to observed reality.
One of my favourite albums is Tourist History by Two Door Cinema Club (DR4) and I think the compression really suits the music. No complaints at all. Another reason why DR Database is great, and better than someone telling you to turn it up or down or whatever - it tells you what the objective measurement is and the rest is a matter of opinion.
At the same time, dynamic compression has been heavy-handed on many a ballad and acoustic-led album, to the detriment of the product, IMO.
If we can move beyond thing-good versus thing-bad we might get a sensible thread.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Indeed. So can we please agree that compression can, in many cases, be a result of a creative choice made by the artists, and not always forced upon them by evil, greedy record labels? And that compression as such isn't "bad" or "good" - it depends on the situation?
darrenyeats
pfm Member
Yeah I agree with that.
However, it's often down not to a creative choice but ignorance and path of least resistance (people around the artists telling them "this is how it's done"). People aren't born knowing this stuff and there are a lot of young musicians who aren't willing or able to question things.
However, it's often down not to a creative choice but ignorance and path of least resistance (people around the artists telling them "this is how it's done"). People aren't born knowing this stuff and there are a lot of young musicians who aren't willing or able to question things.